Do people have a right to sex-selective abortion?

Page 4 of 5 [ 72 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,128
Location: Vancouver, BC

22 Oct 2013, 10:56 am

91 wrote:
Maybe we played with fire. The whole idea was this was supposed to empower women but in the a significant proportion of the world, it has let to an attack on their gender.


But of the two, I believe that it is the lesser harm.


_________________
--James


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

22 Oct 2013, 6:41 pm

91 wrote:
We know that abortion has made the matter worse, because we can see the population statistics.

I disagree. Abortion hasn't made the problem worse, it's brought the full extent of the problem to light. It might actually, over time, make the problem better if people are forced by simple supply and demand to value women a little more.

Quote:
...while women suffered in many of those cultures, they were allowed to be born and were raised.

And they suffered so much that many of them kill themselves. I don't see abortion as a greater evil when the lives involved are that miserable.
Quote:
Now we have seen a technology digested by those attitudes and promoted by a culture that sees access to abortion synonymous with women's rights turned into demographic nightmare for women.

It's a demographic nightmare for men more than it is for women. Women all over the area are finding themselves more able to pick and choose their husbands because men from outside their native countries are also looking for brides, which means that they can marry up and help to support their families in ways that they never could before. There is some human trafficking, yes, but I think it's far out-weighed by the mobility of the women themselves.

Quote:
That being said, we can now see that the idea that access to abortion would lead to a feminist nirvana in the third world has turned out to be totally bunk. So far, nobody who has posted here in defence of the status-quo legal framework has acknowledged that that argument has failed.

"feminist nirvana"? Who ever said that?
And the reason that we don't acknowledge that claim is because we don't agree with it.

Quote:
What does it say for your side when it is the one's you insulted who are the only ones making the argument that women have the right to life?

Where did anyone insult you?
Also, zefs are neither men nor women. They're not even boys or girls.

Quote:
This is an issue we are going to win on.

*shrug*
It's not statistically an issue in the US, at least, so it's not going to negatively impact more than a handful of people here.



Solvejg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,865
Location: gondwana

22 Oct 2013, 8:44 pm

what about chromosomial abnormalities and genetic deseases that are gender specific and carried on the Y chromosome. Should these parents not be able to have their child tested to wipe out the disease?


_________________
I love diggin' in the dirt
With just a pick and brush
Finding fossils is my aim
So I'm never in a rush


91
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

23 Oct 2013, 2:15 am

I think it best for me to disengage from this conversation. There are just too many ideologues in the discussion for anything like rationality to prevail. It is ok to discuss positives and negatives LKL but you can't seriously expect me to deal with an argument that treats the issue like there is nothing that can be done by restricting abortion. I think that you are making a fetish of choice when the real world is in dominated and run by people who engage in compromise. By digging in the result will be that your position will lose more ground when the argument fails due to the reality of logical exceptions.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... right-life


_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

23 Oct 2013, 3:26 am

91, that article presents a straw-man version of both the woman making the choice (as if it were always, and only, fear of physical violence from the father) and of the concept of choice itself. I've tried to explain it to you several times here, but unusually for you, you just aren't understanding where I'm coming from. Usually we end up at an 'I understand, but still disagree,' situation, but it looks like that isn't going to happen here. I'll try to think of another way to say it, but I can't imagine how right now.

edited for spelling.



Last edited by LKL on 23 Oct 2013, 10:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

91
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

23 Oct 2013, 5:12 am

LKL wrote:
91, that article presents a straw-man version of both the woman making the choice (as if it were always, and only, fear of physical violence from the father) and of the concept of choice itself. I've tried to explain it to you several times her, but unusually for you, you just aren't understanding where I'm coming from. Usually we end up at an 'I understand, but still disagree,' situation, but it looks like that isn't going to happen here. I'll try to think of another way to say it, but I can't imagine how right now.


Perhaps but for myself I see the issue of choice not providing anything like a sufficient answer to the problem. The idea that things will right themselves over time is just hopelessly optimistic and not at all comforting. We allow a framework through which we exercise rights on almost every issue. People have the right to own property but not people. States have the right to enact laws but not enslave. When someone tells me they have a right, I ask them what exactly it is they have a right to do? People could theoretically have a right to chose but it does not follow that they have a right to exercise that right regardless of all other considerations. Its an area that calls for compromise and I feel, much like a libertarian trying to end discrimination, your ideology just does not furnish an answer to the question. Sometimes the big government has to say we're integrating the schools and your opinion about that person is not kosher. Sometimes we just have to say, sorry, you might have a right to chose when you want to have a child but you don't have a right to chose what gender or race you want your child to be. As a result, I feel we are talking past one another and so its not really going anywhere.

See it from my point of view, the right to chose, to me, has already proceeded too far already. On its best day I would not affirm it all that heavily. Proponents turned a grave decision into something that happens, in some cases regularly and with as little oversight as possible. Now are really going to accept its extension to the genetic makeup of a child free from any disability at all? When did the right to say when became the right to say what? I just cannot see that claim holding up going forward as technology becomes more capable, especially given the compromise the pro-choice camp has had to make on late-term abortions already.


_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.


crackedpleasures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,936
Location: currently Belgium, longing for the Middle East

23 Oct 2013, 5:39 am

I think it comes down to being in favor of abortion or against it. If you're in favor, most pro-choice people (I am in this group myself) don't ask for a reason why but simply state that the right of abortion should exist for whatever reason the parents wish to do it. Children get aborted for being handicapped too ... Also a sort of discrimination. But if you're pro abortion, I think you simply consider any reason to be valid or, better said, I would simply not ask the reason. I'm pro-choice, but I don't need to know the reason behind that choice. I think it's a private thing between the parents, the reason to abort should not be asked.


_________________
Do what Thou wilt shal be the whole of the Law.
Love is the Law, Love under Will. And...
every man and every woman is a star
(excerpt from The Book of the Law - Aleister Crowley)

"Od lo avda tikvateinu" (excerpt from the Israeli hymn)


91
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

23 Oct 2013, 5:56 am

crackedpleasures wrote:
I think it comes down to being in favor of abortion or against it. If you're in favor, most pro-choice people (I am in this group myself) don't ask for a reason why but simply state that the right of abortion should exist for whatever reason the parents wish to do it. Children get aborted for being handicapped too ... Also a sort of discrimination. But if you're pro abortion, I think you simply consider any reason to be valid or, better said, I would simply not ask the reason. I'm pro-choice, but I don't need to know the reason behind that choice. I think it's a private thing between the parents, the reason to abort should not be asked.


That seems quite simplistic to me. As an employer you would have the right to fire someone but that particular right does not extend to being free to fire someone because they were of a certain race or gender. People in this thread have stated that people would abort for other reasons to avoid oversight but the fact that people can be fired for another reason is no good argument against anti-descrimination laws.


_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

23 Oct 2013, 6:30 am

donnie_darko wrote:
It seems kind of ironic that feminists are so unilaterally in favor of abortion when so many females are missing because of it.

These "females" are zefs. Why care?


_________________
.


Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,463
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

23 Oct 2013, 7:10 am

Vexcalibur wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
It seems kind of ironic that feminists are so unilaterally in favor of abortion when so many females are missing because of it.

These "females" are zefs. Why care?


It nonetheless has created a huge gender imbalance where there are a lot more males than females in those countries. That mean's it's kind of hard for men to find wives and relationship partners to have children with because they outnumber the women. Nonetheless, I still think that the only real way to solve that demographic problem is to change the culture, so that women are valued more, not to restrict abortions.



Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,944

23 Oct 2013, 7:14 am

I dont get, how that gets into an discussion about the general legality of abortion?

Do you think, that being illegal aborted, instead of legally aborted, do a significant change? O_o



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

23 Oct 2013, 7:50 am

Sounds almost like a threat. "Keep abortion legal and we'll abort all the girls".


_________________
.


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

23 Oct 2013, 9:02 am

If you think abortion is permissible, you have no say in how it is used.

Gender selection.

Birth defects (or the possibility thereof).

Inconvenience of the mother.

Etc.

To say that it's an acceptable practice but only in certain cases you approve of is the very definition of hypocrisy.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

23 Oct 2013, 10:09 am

zer0netgain wrote:
If you think abortion is permissible, you have no say in how it is used.

Gender selection.

Birth defects (or the possibility thereof).

Inconvenience of the mother.

Etc.

To say that it's an acceptable practice but only in certain cases you approve of is the very definition of hypocrisy.

"If you say rights to own guns are acceptable, then you have no say in how they are used

Stealing cars.

Starting a black revolution

To say that it's an acceptable practice but only in certain cases you approve of is the very definition of hypocrisy.
".


_________________
.


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

23 Oct 2013, 1:03 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
"If you say rights to own guns are acceptable, then you have no say in how they are used

Stealing cars.

Starting a black revolution

To say that it's an acceptable practice but only in certain cases you approve of is the very definition of hypocrisy.".


Done making your apples to elephants comparison?